A federal judge on Wednesday agreed to allow the first legal challenge to President Trump’s revised executive order on refugees and travel to move forward, scheduling a hearing in a case brought by the state of Hawaii next week on the day before the order is set to take effect.
Hawaii’s attorney general made a request late Tuesday to amend the state’s prior legal complaint, which had challenged the constitutionality of the first travel ban, so that the lawsuit could challenge the revised version.
Hawaii’s request for a temporary restraining order to block implementation of the new order, set to take effect March 16, makes the case the first legal challenge against the new order that was signed Monday.
Hawaii was one of several states to file suit over the travel ban. The state’s case had been put on hold after a lawsuit brought by Washington state’s attorney general led to a nationwide injunction that prevented Mr. Trump’s original order from being enforced.
Mr. Trump signed the revised executive order Monday and rescinded the original order, a move that attorneys for Hawaii argued gives them the opportunity to amend and move forward with their case.
Under the Trump administration’s new order, visitors will be banned for 90 days from six Muslim-majority countries: Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Iraq is no longer on the list.
The new version still will halt for 120 days all refugee resettlement, though it removed the original order’s permanent ban on refugees from Syria and exemptions for religious minorities, namely Christians.
In the court filings, Hawaii’s attorney general and attorneys aiding the state from the Hogan Lovells law firm argued that the new order discriminates against Muslims.
“Given that the new executive order began life as a ’Muslim ban,’ its implementation also means that the state will be forced to tolerate a policy that disfavors one religion and violates the Establishment Clauses of both the federal and state constitutions,” the lawyers wrote.
They detailed how Hawaiian residents, businesses and universities would be negatively affected by the new order.
“The Executive Order means that thousands of individuals across the United States and in Hawai’i who have immediate family members living in the affected countries will now be unable to receive visits from those persons or to be reunited with them in the United States,” the lawyers said in their complaint. “It means that universities, employers, and other institutions throughout the United States and in Hawai’i will be unable to recruit or to welcome qualified individuals from the six designated countries. It threatens certain noncitizens within the United States and in Hawai’i with the possibility that they will be unable to travel abroad and return — for instance, because their visa only permits them one entry, or because their visa will have expired during the time the Executive Order is still in place.”
The Department of Justice declined to comment on the lawsuit.
The order from U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson allowing Hawaii to file its amended complaint also sets a schedule for briefings in the case. The Justice Department must respond by Monday, while a phone conference call over the arguments will be held Wednesday — the day before the new executive order is set to take effect.
• Andrea Noble can be reached at anoble@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.